come on people.. its one day! .. for your own interest! .its ONE day! ..if you cant live without the internet for one day you have other problems... Its ONE DAY! - for our future

Please see the entire message... it is NOT about Wiki being down for one day. The issue is how the pending legislation may affect Freedom of Speech, User Creativity, the legality of anyone and everyone in the US to freely use media materials: for fun (Tanga), academics, news, art, humor, etc.... as shared on the Internet. The issue I'm raising awareness of here is not the Blackout, but the concerns that have prompted Wiki to shut off for 24 hours in protest of the censorship and usage restrictions that are now being debated in the House and Senate. Please take another look.

Guess I'll go back to getting my content thru China and Iran, they'll have less censorship. Hard to believe how stupid most Americans are about their their freedom, and they are so willing to give it up. The Patriot act is a great example of the abuse of power by the government and the stupidity of the people. "1984" was just a few years too early. Let's just let the government totally run our lives and tell us what to do daily.

[2] Most of the Sheeple won't get it.

[3] 1984 meets Fahrenheit 451. Nice.

I've been sending opinions on the pending bills to my legislators via POPVOX, an excellent and well-run mechanism for communicating to our reps in DC:

https://www.popvox.com/

The bills of course are S. 968 and H.R. 3261.

[3] Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Ben Franklin

[6] THANKS for Posting the Bills numbers S. 968 and H.R. 3261, and an easy link to contact one's Senators and Representatives to express opinions on these Bills. Great Resource!

Yeah, this one scares me. I seriously hope the people in our government don't sell us out. I don’t think I could express how devastatingly disappointed I would be with our country(-men) if this was allowed to happen.

Chupper and sykottik agreeing on something. Maybe the world IS ending in 2012. :)

Thanks for the info. I will definitely be contacting my Senators and Representatives.

Thank you so much for posting this! I was not aware of the situation. I let my Representatives know where I stand!

[6] Thank you for directing me to POPVOX! Wow, what a resource!!!

If you think it can't happen (losing the free use of ALL copyrighted, trademarked, or otherwise "Owned" material), even for non-profit, user-created media.... look at some sample messages I've received from Sumo Paint regarding images I used for the "Mixed Bag" Hyper I made:

Sumo commented Dharmarn's profile: Your image (3AcrossReddiwip.jpeg) was set to private by Sumo Moderators.

Sumo commented Dharmarn's profile: Your image (Napoleandynamite.jpg) was set to private by Sumo Moderators.

"Set to private" on Sumo means even I can't access the image file anymore.

And these bills, S. 968 (PIPA) and H.R. 3261 (SOPA) aren't even law yet.

Uh oh... can I write about 'Sumo Paint'?

Again, think about what this means for creating Tanga puzzles. And how else it may affect your (and everyone's) Internet freedoms.

[13] Great points! Never before has something existed like the 'net that allowed such a free, open, and instant exchange of ideas, transcending all geographical and cultural barriers. We have the ability now to shape what this medium will be for the future. It's no small concern. The 'net is going to continue to have a profound influence on the future of human interaction, group thinking, cultural identity, business, etc. Are we going to let a handful of individuals control how it may be used? I choose not to relinquish my rights to information and freedom to contribute to public discourse.

While I don't like the idea of internet censorship, blacking out of Wikipedia isn't enough to prove a point. There will always be file-sharing, pirating of movies/music. I wish instead of censoring our free and public internet, music/movie companies would work with the file sharing, attempt to find new and legal ways of sharing that don't include charging so much.

Why do people bootleg movies? because going to the theater costs more than a paycheck. Add gasoline, and you're edging into two paychecks! Pulling music from the radio has been around for longer than the internet has. Everyone remembers mix tapes and recording from the radio, right?

The majority of people don't make CD's of music to sell. They find the torrents,(files) and copy them onto a CD to listen to in the car, plop them onto their Ipods, ect. That shouldn't be considered illegal, in my opinion.

While I'm hopelessly addicted to Facebook (two deployments does that to a girl) I enjoy the instant connection to family and friends regardless of miles between them. What would happen if you had to second guess what you were posting, sharing, adding to the internet every time you pressed "share?" I've grown up with the internet, my brother had one of the first BBS boards where people could connect digitally and chat. AOL chatrooms turned into ICQ, and then Myspace, which gave way to Facebook. Honestly I can't imagine my life without internet, truth be told I had a hard time when our modem took a poop and our cable company took forever coming to replace it.

The internet can be used for good, or bad. But most people just use it for communication and sharing between friends and strangers. Without it, as much as I shudder to think about it, we might have to step outside and socialize more! Oh dear. (kidding aside, it would suck without internet.)

My two cents. I didn't have time between playing with my dog and making breakfast for my hubs before work to read all these posts, so sorry if I repeated anything. :)

[15] I'm not disagreeing with your overall point but I do want to respond to a couple of things you said. While going to the theater is, indeed, expensive, I think you used a bit too much hyperbole in your claim. I live in a small, inexpensive town so I'm sure my movie prices are lower but let's double them - maybe $20/ticket. No one says you have to buy snacks, but let's say you do. So maybe $30 or $40? Surely that's not a paycheck for most people? And let's say I'm totally clueless about how much stuff costs other places - double that to $80 - still not a full paycheck...right? (And I deliberately only included 1 person because 2 people would arguably have 2 paychecks...).

At any rate, your claim aside, I think it's a dangerous road to head down when we start justifying theft because the people who rightfully own the stuff charge too much for it. They charge high prices at theaters and sporting events, etc. because enough people are willing to pay them. Quit paying and prices will go down. But the implied "they charge too much so it's ok for me to just take" idea would justify any theft of anything. It just feels different with digital media because you aren't taking a physical object off a shelf and tucking it under your coat.

Then there's the "copying songs from the radio" claim. Yes, I did that too. But we all know that the quality was not the same as buying the album (or CD or tape). So if we really liked the music, we typically bought it as well. Now, people can illegally get the music - at the highestet quality - and never pay a dime. How can the musicians and music industry stay in business if everyone can get their music for free? Yes, I'm not turning around and selling it... but if I steal something from Wal-Mart for my own personal use, I'm not selling that either. Copying movies and music from TV and radio - we were legally viewing/listening and had the legal right to record for our own purposes. You don't have the legal right to download a perfect digital copy of something you haven't purchased.

I'm not sure how we got to the point of so many people believing it's ok to copy someone's artistic endeavor and not give them anything for it. Painters, potters, sculptors, and other artists who generate physical objects are lucky that you can't easily copy their work, so thus you have to buy it. Why should you be able to take a musicians work for free just because you can and you want to listen to it in your car? If someone steals a famous photographer's pictures and makes them available on the internet, surely it's not ok for me to download that picture, print it, and hang it on my wall because I want to look at it?

I agree that we are in a new age where information is so easily accessible. We've come to expect to catch whatever song, whatever sitcom episode we want and watch it for free on YouTube. The entertainment industries are justifiably anxious about this. The road forward isn't clear yet and they are responding by trying to protect what they have. Hopefully someone will come up with a creative way for those businesses to survive in this new age in a way that keeps our ready access to information and keeps people from feeling it's ok to steal. I don't think SOPA/PIPA is it and I hope they don't pass. I just don't like to see "internet freedom" used to justify illegal behavior - I think that makes the "internet freedom" arguments that much harder to push forward.

[16] Well that's it! The world is definitely going to end in 2012. When Sykottik and Sonjahi totally agree on an issue the end must be near. Your comments on the music industry are right on. Why write and record a song then just give it away with zero compensation.

I do my part when it comes to ticket prices at the movies. I don't go. My family is just as happy to wait a month or two and then gather in the living room and watch the "latest" movie that I rented from Redbox for a dollar.

[17] It's really OK. I like people who talk too much. Since I'm deaf, it's really so much fun to let someone go on and on and on... and on. Then when they are finished, I say "what? Sorry, but I read lips could you please repeat that while looking at me." When someone writes too much, one doesn't have to read it.

I have not seen much discussion on the impact of the proposed legislation on the rights to Fair Use. I'll admit that I haven't read the legislation, so I cannot myself comment on any potential impacts.

I believe that we can probably defend the use of copyrighted materials in our tanga puzzles as Fair Use, though perhaps someone more knowledgeable in copyright law can comment.

FWIW, here is what the US copyright office says about Fair Use:

"One of the rights accorded to the owner of copyright is the right to reproduce or to authorize others to reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords. This right is subject to certain limitations found in sections 107 through 118 of the copyright law (title 17, U. S. Code). One of the more important limitations is the doctrine of “fair use.” The doctrine of fair use has developed through a substantial number of court decisions over the years and has been codified in section 107 of the copyright law.

Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair:

-The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes
-The nature of the copyrighted work
-The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole
-The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work

The distinction between fair use and infringement may be unclear and not easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission."

[20] Thanks for the research and the post. I don't know what impact SOPA and/or PIPA will have on the "Fair Use" doctrine.... I noticed it doesn't list gaming/entertainment? Will we need to establish pay-pal type accounts to pay royalty fees if we want to use an image of The Fonz, Rosemary Clooney, an Album cover, the game Othello, quote from Walt Disney, etc... in one of our puzzles? I just don't know what this will mean for Tanga. I have concerns in other areas of use, but am focusing on the potential repercussions for Tanga in this forum. Thanks again for the info.

EXCERPT from WASHINGTON POST ARTCICLE 01/18/12:

...But already, the momentum of the two controversial bills has been largely halted. Just weeks ago, they seemed on their way to passage, having cleared a Senate committee and garnered bipartisan support in the House.

Now, there is a bipartisan retreat. Sen. Benjamin L. Cardin (D-Md.), who co-sponsored an earlier version of the bill, has announced his opposition. Six Republicans on the same Senate committee — all of whom voted for the bill before — have written Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) to ask that he slow the bill down, so it can be modified and considered later.

“We have increasingly heard from a large number of constituents and stakeholders with vocal concerns about possible unintended consequences of the proposed legislation,” the six wrote. They included Sen. Charles E. Grassley (Iowa), the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

In the back offices of the Senate, many longtime aides were amazed at how quickly a new lobbying force had managed to outmaneuver experienced heavyweights. Sites such as Wikipedia and Tumblr had encouraged users to contact legislators, resulting in a flood of unhappy calls.

One Republican aide said that “SOPA” had already become “a dirty word beyond anything you can imagine.”

Both of the bills would allow the Justice Department to seek an injunction in court, barring U.S. sites from processing payments for a rogue Web site, selling it ads or listing its link among search-engine results.

“There’s no fundamental First Amendment right to engage in thievery. Nor to advertise thievery,” said Howard Gantman, at the Motion Picture Association of America. He said that the Internet’s free-for-all nature should not allow U.S. companies impunity to deal with crooks.

“Do we want to have laws?” Gantman said. “Or do we want to just say it’s a free-for-all Wild West?”

In addition to the costs, however, the tech companies say they would have to police vast sites full of user-generated content. They also objected to a provision that would have stripped the rogue sites out of the Internet’s virtual phone book. If a U.S. user entered the Web address, it would appear the site didn’t exist.

That provision “says that we’re no longer committed to the idea that there’s one Web. We’re no longer committed to the idea that any one person, anywhere in the world, can reach any one site anywhere else in the world,” said Sherwin Siy, of the nonprofit advocacy group Public Knowledge.

Over the weekend, the tech companies won a major victory. White House officials signaled concerns about the phone-book provision. The bill’s sponsors had already said they would remove it.

But several companies say they still have significant problems with the bill. They say the bill spreads culpability too widely and could leave Web sites facing expensive legal fights for a single link to a site deemed to be “rogue.”

Instead, many companies have proposed an approach in which the Web sites could police themselves, overseen by an international nonprofit that tracks bad actors.

“This is an industry where you can start with a laptop and a good idea and make a billion-dollar company,” said Alexis Ohanian, the co-founder of Reddit.com. Ohanian said that if the new bill adds potential legal liabilities, the result could be less innovation on the Web.

Staff writers Paul Kane, Cecilia Kang, David Nakamura and Hayley Tsukayama contributed to this report.

sonjahi, I'm so glad that you said what you did in [16]; I agree with it wholeheartedly. It was probably the most valuable comment on tanga so far this year. Conversely, [17] is one of the most off-target comments this year -- I made sure to flag it.

Kudos to dharmaRN for bringing this topic up. I contacted my congressmen and my senators today and voiced my opinion. I would never have done that without her 'nudge'.

[24] Agree....Thanks D....

Thanks to everyone who contacted their Represntatives in some way... looks like the current versions of PIPA and SOPA are nose-diving. It's awesome to see Democracy in action!
There will be other bills, but hopefully those will address Piracy without broadly squeezing out non-pirating uses of copyrighted and trademarked materials. i.e. sanctions for someone who bootlegs a "B-52's" album, but freedom to use an image of the album cover to create a puzzle for Tanga, or send the image to someone who wants to purchase the exact item.

Great news! Thanks for keeping us updated!

I found a nice YouTube video that you can use to explain SOPA and PIPA to other less technical people, or maybe just to people who haven't had time to research them:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBy7yooz3MM

[28] Another excellent Resource, dj! Reposting your [6] POPVOX for easy-linking:

[6]: I've been sending opinions on the pending bills to my legislators via POPVOX, an excellent and well-run mechanism for communicating to our reps in DC:

https://www.popvox.com/

The bills of course are S. 968 and H.R. 3261.

[28], [29],[6] Thanks for making it clearer and easier!

http://www.ted.com/talks/defend_our_freedom_to_share_or_why_sopa_is_a_bad_idea.html?utm_source=newsletter_weekly_2012-01-20&utm_campaign=newsletter_weekly&utm_medium=email

Watch this: Succinct and very disturbing!

Just watched it. Speaker does a great job explaining the situation. It is disturbing and not going to go away. Thanks, dharjmaRN

[32] That's dharjmahiRN

I, too, want to thank dharma for bringing up this topic. Here is the email that I received from Sen. Ben Cardin (D MD) in response to a message I sent after reading dharma's post:

"Thank you for writing to me regarding the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act ("PROTECT IP" or "PIPA") (S.968). I value your input and appreciate your willingness to take the time to share your thoughts with me on this important issue.

The Internet is the transformational tool that it is because of the freedoms it allows and the connections that it helps make possible. At the same time, the reality is that Internet piracy costs America's economy billions of dollars each year and hundreds of thousands of jobs. There is a common awareness that something must be done to stop this theft of American intellectual property, whether it be movies, music, journalism, or engineering designs. I believe that we can find a way to balance the freedoms essential to a vital and ever changing online world, with protections necessary to fight illegal activity solely designed to steal and cheat.

PIPA is narrowly tailored legislation that does differ from the much broader Stop Online Piracy Act ("SOPA") legislation currently pending in the House of Representatives. Nonetheless, there are real concerns with PIPA, as currently drafted, that still need to be addressed. Based on many concerns, the Senate decided not to take up the debate on this issue immediately. I will continue to seek out meaningful alternatives that would fix the bill's current flaws.

Thank you, again, for writing to me regarding this important issue and feel free to contact me with any future concerns."

[35] I got the same form letter from Sen. Cardin's office. It is basically the same statement he has been sending back on this topic for the last few months. But in the face of the successful opposition raised on social media and elsewhere, he has now changed his position to "Leaning No" on PIPA. Surprisingly (?), he is listed as a "Co-Sponsor" of the PIPA legislation in the Senate, and receives thousands in donations from the TV/Movies/Music industry. (Though not nearly as much as other supporters in Congress receive.)

Here's a great summary of positions, with links to a chart of how much each receives from those industries:

http://projects.propublica.org/sopa/

Remember, as the MPAA is saying, this is only "round one". SOPA/PIPA type legislation will be back, and we need to be prepared to fight for what we believe in.

[35][36] I'm happy to say that the letter I received from Sen Pat Toomy was NOT an identical form letter as Sen Cardin's. ASSuming he is being truthful (I know, I know, he's a politician) I like his comment:
In my view, piracy of intellectual property is a legitimate concern that should be addressed. However, the PROTECT IP Act and the Stop Internet Piracy Act are flawed, and I cannot support them in their current form. - Pat Toomey
U.S. Senator, Pennsylvania

Sorry to pop this subject up again, but there is a new related activity going on now in secret that few people know about. To quote from the EFF mailing I just received:

Right now, representatives from nine countries including the United States are secretly meeting in a luxury hotel in Beverly Hills to negotiate the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, a trade agreement with the potential to contain intellectual property provisions that go beyond ACTA. These secret meetings could create over-reaching new rules and standards that will choke off the online speech of individuals, websites, and platforms accused of copyright infringement.

But because the meetings are held behind closed doors and the text has not been released to the public, the citizens who will be affected do not know the details and don’t have a voice.

You can visit EFF's Action Center at

https://action.eff.org/o/9042/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=8229

to join EFF in demanding a Congressional hearing so lawmakers can learn what’s in the TPP and hear from all affected stakeholders, not just the content industry.

And again another SOPA/PIPA-type bill was quietly introduced yesterday in the Senate:

http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/207255-senate-cybersecurity-bill-sparking-concerns-about-government-control

Comments as before can be sent to your senators at

https://www.popvox.com/bills/us/112/s2105

"Say 'hello' to CISPA, it will remind you of SOPA"

Going to the House in about 2 weeks:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57413627-93/say-hello-to-cispa-it-will-remind-you-of-sopa/

Yet another attempt (quoting from the CNET article) to "gut[s] citizens' online privacy protections but even more, it allows the US government to use Internet companies to access, intercept or stop the digital communications and online activity of any person - 'for cybersecurity purposes.' "

Again, you can get more info and send your reps comments via POPVOX at:

https://www.popvox.com/bills/us/112/hr3523

We really meed to pay attention to this new CISPA bill. Sorry to see no one has commented on it. This is a link to the EFF's FAQ on this dangerous legislation, which many have said is "worse than SOPA/PIPA":

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/04/cybersecurity-bill-faq-disturbing-privacy-dangers-cispa-and-how-you-stop-it

Commenting on Tanga is fine but everyone really needs to petition congress .......
(of course receiving a mindless generic response isn't wonderful either)

Thank you for contacting your Congressional office. Understanding your ideas and concerns is important to me, as it helps me to better represent you and the Eighth District of Pennsylvania.

Mike Fitzpatrick
Member of Congress

[42] The people I've emailed at POPVOX (many ex-Congressional staffers) tell me even though a generic response is often generated by their systems so senders don't feel ignored, the offices do keep track of the quantities and views sent by their constituents. I don't think it's a waste of time at all to send opinions, since most of their voters don't do anything. I think that's a big part of why SOPA/PIPA got rejected the first time. Watch out for "SOPA 2":

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/04/hollywood-loves-sequel-really-sopa-2

[43] Don'tcha just love a good SOPA Opera?

It is EXTREMELY important to weight in on CISPA right now, especially if you are against it.

https://www.popvox.com/bills/us/112/hr3523

From the LA Times(4/16):
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-cispa-protests-begin-amid-key-changes-to-legislation-20120416,0,5314596.story?page=1

From Yahoo News (4/14):
http://news.yahoo.com/cispa-draft-narrows-cybersecurity-language-protests-loom-134202431.html

From Wired (4/18):
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/04/opinion-meeks-cispa-cyber/